Most people, I think, are in favor of protecting the ecosystem implicitly because it makes the world a more pleasant place for us to live in. There's talk about not harming the planet for philosophical reasons but that's all window dressing. Humans work for humans.
That's also humans, though.
I can’t ever take those people seriously, vs people who see it as humanity’s role to be good stewards of the earth and operate in balance with it.
People just like being edgy, best to give them no mind.
Killing an entire species to save a few humans. Being concerned about the ecological disaster when we are the worst ecological disaster. Those are pretty hypocritical viewpoints although common and completely normal with the constraints of normal human behavior.
The only reason you are so callous is because you imagine those dying as others, not you, your neighbors or loved ones.
Not going to keep replying, because I know you don't really believe these things when push comes to shove.
Also It’s not as black and white as you’re painting it. I happen to see it both ways and side humans too because, why not? I am not team mosquito. (I think you’re mistaking me for someone debating with you, I just jumped in the thread to say I see there point, doesn’t mean I agree with it and it doesn’t mean they lack empathy. There is this thing called dark humor and it’s possible to hold that alternate view as a point of humor.) Also not returning to comment.
I, too, think it's likely no ecological disaster will occur, but at the same time it's still possible. Nevertheless, from a cost-benefit perspective, for me it's a risk worth taking.